Rahm Emanuel Must Resign

Rahm Emanuel Must Resign
Rahm Emanuel is sorry (now)

Rahm Emanuel got weepy yesterday in front of the City Council.  Mayor Emanuel was weepy because he has had a tough month.  His tough month began when his lawyers lost a court battle to keep the video of Laquan McDonald being gunned down by a Chicago Police officer from public view. 

Since then, Rahm has been on the defensive. 

And that is how it should be.  He intentionally kept that video from the public eye so he could win reelection. 

There can be no doubt about that fact.  Laquan McDonald was gunned down in October 2014, during a fierce election battle that ended in a run-off election between him and someone who, frankly, wasn’t qualified to be mayor. 

Do you really think Rahm Emanuel didn’t know what happened to Laquan McDonald in October 2014?    

So when the Mayor tearfully lectures us on what has to happen in Chicago, I ask myself: Why now Rahm? 

The answer is easy: He’s sorry he got in trouble.  If he was sorry about what happened to Laquan McDonald, Mayor Emanuel would have made that impassioned speech in November 2014. 

But he didn’t.  And that’s because he was up for reelection and he knew that if that video surfaced, a guy who shares a name with a Wookie would have been mayor of Chicago. 

But, let’s take a moment and give Rahm Emanuel the benefit of the doubt.  Let’s say he really thought that it was in the best interest of the city that he be reelected and therefore, he kept the video quiet until after the election.  Under that hypothetical, Rahm would have come forward and given yesterday’s tearful speech in April 2015. 

But what happened in April 2015?  His office recommended a $5 million settlement with McDonald’s family.  As part of that settlement, there was a provision that McDonald’s family would not seek to release the video of his shooting. 

When he agreed to that settlement, did tearful Rahm Emanuel get on the dais, pound his fist on a podium and tell us that police shouldn’t shoot citizens 16 times? 

He didn’t say a damn thing. 

And that’s why this city needs new leadership.  The only reason he’s crying now is because he got caught.  It’s the preacher that gets busted for having an extramarital affair.  The guy tearfully goes up to his flock and cries about having sinned. 

And yesterday Rahm did cry.  He did apologize.  But he didn’t apologize for his involvement.  He didn’t apologize for his lack of action.  He apologized for the action of others. 

I separate what the police officer did—which was clearly wrong—and what Rahm Emanuel, Anita Alvarez and Garry McCarthy did.  I give McCarthy a bit of a pass, because he wasn’t acting independently.  McCarthy was doing what his boss—Rahm Emanuel—told him to do.  McCarthy had to go too—but he had to go because of his statements defending Dante Servin blindly firing a gun into an alley.  Apparently, in McCarthy’s police force, off-duty police officers blindly shooting guns into alleys are OK.  It isn’t.  McCarthy should have said as much.     

But in terms of Laquan McDonald, McCarthy took his marching orders from one person: Rahm Emanuel.  Rahm Emanuel tried to cover up what Jason Van Dyke did to Laquan McDonald.  Why else did he not discuss it until after a judge forced his hand?  He only cared about Laquan McDonald after the public saw the video of his death; even though he told the Council to give his family $5 million seven months before.  Emanuel is not crying for Laquan being a “second-class citizen” as he said yesterday.  He’s crying because his reputation is in tatters.       

Rahm Emanuel spoke passionately about the police “Code of Silence” without acknowledging that HE WAS PART OF IT FOR 400 DAYS!        

If he truly believed everything he said yesterday, he would have made that speech months ago.

Rahm Emanuel: It is time for you to lead.  You had over 400 days of opportunity to do so and you failed miserably.  So now, if you want to lead: resign. 

You said the city needs a new start; give us one and resign. 

Filed under: Chicago Politics


Leave a comment
  • Rahm and his ego will never voluntarily resign, when he goes ( I hope), please take Ms. Alvarez with you.

  • I usually figure that when someone says they won't resign, one will soon enough. The other problem I had with his speech is while he did the emotion part, he didn't say what he would do to clean up the mess.

    But since you don't live in Chicago, the people of Chicago are going to have to consider the alternative, since as the Bilandic and Sawyer years demonstrate the City Council selects the successor.. Are the various caucuses going to figure this out, or is Ed Burke going to select a Black puppet (like Sawyer) or bring back Gery Chico?

  • fb_avatar

    People are talking about resigning, why aren't people thinking of the big picture? All these people who knew about this should be in jail!
    Call me crazy, but isn't this equal to a cover up in murder? If this video didn't show up it would have been swept up under the rug?
    Why aren't people talking about that?!

  • In reply to Rudy Fernandez:

    Let's put it this way, covering up a murder is hiding the body, NOT asserting an FOIA exemption in court, or the city attorney telling the city council that the representatives of a decedent's estate contend that such and such happened and are willing to settle, rather than such and such happened. Also, the state's attorney has prosecutorial immunity.

  • fb_avatar

    I'm a firm believer in assessing a situation and to let the facts be presented so that everybody can understand what is truly happening.

    Fact, La Quan McDonald did have a weapon in his hand.
    Fact, Shots were fired upon McDonald.
    The real question is...
    Why did the police officer shoot? Who was in dire danger?
    Who needed help? The officer or LQ McD

    Fact, The police officer can only use the weapon as a last resort for
    defense in fighting for his/her life.
    Fact, no one was approaching La Quan when he exposed the knife.
    Fact, Why were 16 shots fired? C'mon, 16 shots, for what reason.

    Fact, 16 shots are held accountable for the actions of the police officer who responded to La Quan.

    Fact, there was more than one officer of the law when La Quan was fired upon.

    Fact, the officer shot La Quan more than once. Was that really necessary? No, it wasn't. So why did it take so long for anyone to see what was truly happening.

    If that were me, I would have done better and stepped in to help the young man, rather than gun him down. It is clear La Quan had a knife and only a knife. Nothing else.

    That means someone could have chosen to subdue him or at least taze him before using excessive force.

    The officer was clearly wrong for the way he responded to La Quan.
    That officer knew exactly what he was doing.

    La Quan also knew what he doing when he had the knife in his possession and knew exactly what the outcome would be.

    Too many people in the world have it easy because the laws have changed. That's what I'm getting at! Here's my case in point...

    People have gone lawsuit crazy to get what they want out of life and will whatever it takes to get at it, so that they have it easy, like living on Easy Street.

    To me, that is what I can see from all this craziness and it scares anyone who has money or property. So much is at stake and when someone loses out, they lose out big time.

    "No one is immune" to this lawsuit craziness.

    Why else would people settle out of court or make some type of settlement for someone who can no longer hold back their emotions and just let their rage take over.

    It's Something To Think About?

  • In reply to Radarlove Bargas:

    I was with you until the lawsuit crazy point. Here the city settled well before any lawsuit. The only debate in the media was whether it settled to cover up the video.

    I'm sure that lawsuits have nothing to do with the gang warfare up and down 79th St.

  • In reply to Radarlove Bargas:

    If nothing else, this Sun-Times article indicates that the only thing that will shed any light on this is a civil suit, as it says in those cases, the detectives and IPRA did nothing.

Leave a comment